Evaluating convergent validity between RAISD and MSWO rankings across informants

The Reinforcer Assessment for Individuals with Severe Disabilities (RAISD) and multiple‐stimulus without replacement preference assessment (MSWO) are evidence‐based tools used to determine preferences indirectly through interview and observation of choice making, respectively. Often, the RAISD is us...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inBehavioral interventions Vol. 38; no. 4; pp. 1 - 14
Main Authors Jeglum, Sara R., Melanson, Isaac J., O’Brien, Matthew J.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Chichester Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.11.2023
Subjects
Behavior disorders
Behavior modification
convergent validity
MSWO
Patient assessment
People with disabilities
preference assessment
Questionnaires
RAISD
Reinforcement
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN1072-0847
1099-078X
DOI10.1002/bin.1964

Cover

More Information
Summary:The Reinforcer Assessment for Individuals with Severe Disabilities (RAISD) and multiple‐stimulus without replacement preference assessment (MSWO) are evidence‐based tools used to determine preferences indirectly through interview and observation of choice making, respectively. Often, the RAISD is used to inform the stimulus array of the MSWO. However, reports frequently vary between informants. This can lead to discrepant identification of putative reinforcers and therefore has the potential for weaker or ineffective reinforcement‐based treatments. The purpose of this study was to compare RAISD and MSWO outcomes across informants (adolescent, caregiver, and teacher) and evaluate the convergent validity between the two measures. The results indicated that across participants, RAISD and MSWO results rarely produced convergent validity. Implications for practitioners and researchers are discussed.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ISSN:1072-0847
1099-078X
DOI:10.1002/bin.1964